West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Medical Center and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California (A.M.G., E.P.T.).
West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Los Angeles, California (S.M., M.M.B., I.M.M., P.G.S.).
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Mar 3;172(5):317-324. doi: 10.7326/M19-2628. Epub 2020 Feb 4.
Bedside "sitters" are often used for patients at high risk for falls, but they are expensive and their effectiveness is unclear.
To review evidence about the effect of sitters and alternatives to sitters on patient falls in acute care hospitals.
PubMed searches to 8 October 2019, other databases from inception to December 2018, citation searches on key articles, and a Google search (22 October 2019).
English-language studies of any design that assessed the effect of adding sitters to usual care or compared alternatives to sitters (for example, video monitors or "close observation units") for adult patients on general wards of acute care hospitals and reported falls as a primary outcome.
Dual-reviewer extraction of study data and risk of bias; single reviewer with group discussion for GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) certainty of evidence.
Of 20 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 2 added sitters to usual care and 18 compared alternatives to sitters. There were no randomized trials, 11 time-series studies, 1 retrospective quasi-experimental study, and 8 pre-post studies. All studies had at least 1 methodological limitation. Two studies provided very-low-certainty evidence that adding sitters reduced falls. Eight studies provided moderate-certainty evidence that interventions that included video monitoring reduced sitter use and either did not affect or reduced the number of falls. Very-low-certainty evidence suggested that interventions that included nurse assessment tools (3 studies) or a close observation unit (2 studies) were effective alternatives to sitters.
No studies had low risk of bias, publication bias is likely, and studies may have been missed.
Despite a compelling rationale, evidence is scant that adding sitters to usual care reduces falls.
Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative. (PROSPERO: CRD42019127424).
床边“陪护者”常用于高跌倒风险的患者,但他们的费用昂贵,其效果也不明确。
综述有关陪护者以及替代陪护者的措施对急性护理医院患者跌倒的影响的证据。
2019 年 10 月 8 日之前在 PubMed 上进行的检索、其他数据库从成立到 2018 年 12 月的检索、关键文章的引文检索以及 2019 年 10 月 22 日的 Google 搜索。
任何设计的英语语言研究,评估将陪护者添加到常规护理中或比较替代陪护者(例如视频监测或“密切观察单位”)对急性护理医院普通病房成年患者的效果,并将跌倒作为主要结果进行报告。
两位审查员对研究数据和偏倚风险进行提取;对于 GRADE(推荐评估、制定与评价)证据确定性,由一位审查员进行讨论。
符合纳入标准的 20 项研究中,2 项研究将陪护者添加到常规护理中,18 项研究比较了替代陪护者。没有随机试验,11 项时间序列研究、1 项回顾性准实验研究和 8 项前后研究。所有研究都至少有 1 项方法学局限性。有 2 项研究提供了非常低确定性的证据表明添加陪护者可减少跌倒。有 8 项研究提供了中等确定性的证据表明,包括视频监测的干预措施减少了陪护者的使用,并且要么没有影响或减少了跌倒的数量。非常低确定性的证据表明,包括护士评估工具(3 项研究)或密切观察单位(2 项研究)的干预措施是陪护者的有效替代措施。
没有研究具有低偏倚风险,可能存在发表偏倚,并且可能遗漏了一些研究。
尽管有充分的理由,但证据表明将陪护者添加到常规护理中并不能减少跌倒。
退伍军人事务部质量增强研究倡议。(PROSPERO:CRD42019127424)。